If Bob Dylan’s right, “the times they are changing”. But what is time anyway? We usually carve up time in terms of the past, the present and the future. But are all of these temporal divisions on an equal ontological footing? Or is there something ontologically special about the present moment, the now? If so, how should we conceive of the past and the future? Are they real? Does time really flow (like we think it does)? And what’s the relationship between space and time? Are the laws of physics time reversible? Is time travel possible?

Philosophers have always been interested in art and aesthetic value. But what is art anyway? How should we define the notion of art? And what is it that distinguishes art from non-art? How about aesthetic value… Is aesthetic value something that resides in the object itself? Or does it have more to do with a kind of feeling, judgment, or sense of satisfaction had by an observer? Do the intentions of the artist play a role here? Should art have a purpose, such as evoking pleasure or conveying truth?

If God really does exist as an all-knowing, all-powerful, wholly-benevolent being, then how can the theist explain the existence of pain and suffering in the world? Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Is he able, but not willing? If he is both able and willing, whence then evil. And if he is neither able nor willing, why call Him God at all? What is ‘evil’ anyway? Does it really exist? Are there different kinds of evil? If so, how do these differences affect the so-called problem of evil? Is the existence of pain and suffering logically incompatible with the existence of God? Or is there some way to rationally reconcile the existence of evil with the existence of God? Even if there is some way to resolve the apparent inconsistency, doesn’t the existence of evil at least make the existence of God improbable? Given the tremendous amount of senseless pain and suffering evident in the world, isn’t it highly unlikely that a benevolent God exists?

Does God exist? What are the arguments that have been offered for the existence of God? Are they like other kinds of philosophical arguments? Are they a priori arguments? a posteriori arguments? Transcendental arguments? Inferences to the best explanation? Are some arguments for the existence of god better than others? If so, what are they and why? Can we infer the existence of god from the idea of god alone– without any appeal to experience? Or would it be better to try and infer the existence of god from the effects of god supposedly evidenced in the world? What are the arguments for the existence of god meant to establish, anyway? Is the existence of god something that can be demonstrably proven? Or are the arguments for the existence of god only probabilistic arguments? Are they meant to convince non-believers to join the club? Or are they primarily intended to provide the believer with some kind of rational basis for their own theological beliefs?

What is a possible world? Where do possible worlds come from? And what are they used for? How many possible worlds are there? Are they real worlds? Concrete worlds? Or are they just descriptions or stories about the way things might have been? Are there any impossible worlds? If so, what are they? And why? How does it all work? What should we make of these modal mysteries? Is there any way to tame this important philosophical beast and remove some of the mystery that overshadows its merits? Is it possible to explain what possible worlds are and how philosophers use them without getting too technically entangled?

What is Meta-Ethics? What separates Meta-Ethics from other branches of moral philosophy? How should we understand the nature of moral properties, ethical statements, moral judgments and moral reasons? What is moral goodness? Are there any moral facts? If so, what are they and where are they located? Are there objective, absolute moral values or is moral value relative? What are the semantics of moral language? What’s the best way to analyze or define ethical terms such as ‘good’, ‘ought’, and ‘right’. Should we be internalists or externalists about moral reasons? And how do moral attitudes motivate action?

What is skepticism? Are there different varieties of skepticism? Is skepticism primarily an epistemological issue? What’s the aim of a skeptical argument? Should skeptical arguments be taken seriously? If so, why? What’s philosophically significant about skepticism? Can a certain amount of skepticism be healthy? What’s the best strategy for responding to skeptical arguments? Is there a rational response that could be offered against the skeptic? If not, what sort of implications are we left to deal with? Are we all just brains in vats?

What is a paradox anyway? And why are philosophers so interested in paradoxes? Is a paradox just a fancy kind of riddle? Or is it some kind of demonstration that a contradiction (or absurd consequence) follows from apparently reasonable assumptions? Do paradoxes actually point out some inexplicable fact about the nature of the world? Or are they just logical/linguistic games? Perhaps the notion of paradox includes all of these elements… or maybe none at all. What merit is there, if any, in analyzing and discussing philosophical paradoxes? Join the GRS crew as they consider the puzzling complexities of the Ship of Theseus, The Lottery and Kripke’s Puzzle About Belief.

What is a paradox anyway? And why are philosophers so interested in paradoxes? Is a paradox just a fancy kind of riddle? Or is it some kind of demonstration that a contradiction (or absurd consequence) follows from apparently reasonable assumptions? Do paradoxes actually point out some inexplicable fact about the nature of the world? Or are they just logical/linguistic games? Perhaps the notion of paradox includes all of these elements… or maybe none at all. What merit is there, if any, in analyzing and discussing philosophical paradoxes? Join the GRS crew as they consider the puzzling complexities of the Sorites and the Liar paradoxes.

What sort of thing is the mind? And what’s the relationship between the mind and the body, between mental things and physical things? Is the mind composed of some sort of non-physical substance? Or is the mind just a particular sort of physical substance, perhaps organized in a distinctive way? Is there some other way of understanding the relationship between mind and body? Are minds merely brains? Are mental states just identical to certain kinds of brain states? Are mental states nothing more than certain dispositions to behave in certain ways? What is the nature of consciousness? Is it possible for a purely physical object to be conscious? Could a sophisticated machine be conscious? What is the nature of thought? How does the mind represent the world? Are the content of our thoughts determined by the brain or by the environment? What’s the relation between the philosophy of mind, psychology, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, cognitive science and other fields with interest in human minds?

So what’s the GRS all about, really? Over the years, many have inquired and tonight the crew hopes to set the record straight (that is, at least, insofar as the record can be straight!). Where did the GRS come from? What are the particular objectives (or goals) of the GRS? Is there any aim to the show at all? If so, what are we trying to do? What are we NOT trying to do? What about the particular format of the GRS? The music, commercials, monologues, discussions, guests and street interviews… is there any method to the madness? Is this an appropriate way to do philosophy? Can a philosophy talk show be fun, sarcastic, informal, goofy AND informative, engaging, relevant and thought provoking? These are just some of the interesting questions that the GRS crew will be addressing during this special ‘tell-all’ GRS exposé– So get ready, its The 28th Episode Spectacular on the GRS!

What is the philosophy of language? How does the philosophy of language differ from linguistics, or from other branches of philosophy? Why do philosophers study language? What is the purpose of language? How does language relate to the mind, both of the speaker and the interpreter? How does language relate to the world? What is the nature of meaning? What is the relation between meaning and reference? How are sentences composed into a meaningful whole, and what are the meanings of the parts of sentences? Why do expressions have the meanings they have? How do words and sentences acquire meanings?

What’s the distinction (if any) between the philosophy of film, philosophy in film, philosophy and film or philosophy through film? Do these different titles refer to different disciplines with different objectives? Or is there some unifying relation between these notions? What’s the primary interest in pursuing the notion of philosophy & film? Is the interest interpretative (i.e., making use of philosophical positions, concepts, etc in the interpretation of films)? Or is the primary interest pedagogical (i.e., making use of film in order to illustrate some philosophical position, concept, etc)? Is it both? Neither? How does philosophy & film relate to (or deal with) more traditional philosophical questions related to aesthetics? Is film an art form? If so, what sort of art form is it? In what can the aesthetic value of a film consist? Are some films artworks, while other are just entertainment? If so, what is the difference? Is film somehow especially helpful when it comes to teaching and/or understanding philosophical positions, concepts, etc? If so, why?

What is Intelligent Design Theory? Is Intelligent Design Theory a scientific theory? Why or why not? If so, is it a good theory? What is the philosophical significance of the debate about intelligent design? How is Intelligent Design Theory different from other theories or theses involving design? What claims are Intelligent Design Theorists committed to? What claims are they not committed to? What is the explanatory aim of Intelligent Design Theory? Are we justified in teaching Intelligent Design Theory in public schools? What would make it justified or unjustified? Do certain religious views force one to decide between intelligent design and evolution? If so, why?

What is the philosophy of science? What is it that philosophers of science do? What sort of issues is the philosophy of science interested in investigating? What is the relationship between science and the philosophy of science? How do philosophers add to the work of scientists? Do scientists need philosophers of science? Can the structure and history of science tell us anything about how to do philosophy? What scientific fields ought to be studied more by philosophers of science?

What is logic? What does it mean to think logically? Can anyone be logical? What sorts of issues are logicians interested in reconciling? Is being logical better than being illogical? Is it always better? If so, why? Why should people think logically? What benefits are there to thinking in a logically consist manner? Are there different kinds of logic? If so, how should we evaluate the merits of a particular logical system?

Why does it seem like everyone’s in some sort of therapy these days? You’ve got the psychiatrists, the psychologists, social workers and counselors galore! Marriage counselors, Divorce counselors, Economic counselors, and Spiritual counselors. No one’s questioning the fact that people enjoy having specialists helping them out with their problems. I guess the real question is, are individuals getting the help they need from these therapeutic specialists? Are these therapeutic aficionados the right people to consult when you want a problem resolved? Perhaps they are. But how come no one ever asks a philosopher to help with their problems? Philosophers have been in the “problem solving business for over 2000 years, and are often able to work through difficult issues in unimaginable ways. In this special GRS episode, the crew is going to try and put our money where their mouths are and do some live philosophical counseling. So if you’d like to have a real problem solving professional analyze one of your personal conundrums, have a seat on the ‘Socratic Couch’ and tune into this ‘tongue in cheek’ episode of the GRS.

What is ‘Eastern’ philosophy? What sort of distinction(s) is intended by the use of Eastern in this context? Is the distinction primarily intended to differentiate between Eastern and Western philosophy? If so, is this a legitimate distinction to make? And on what grounds is such a distinction predicated? Is such a distinction more misleading than enlightening? Can all non-Western philosophy be classified as Eastern philosophy? Are there similarities between the various Eastern philosophical schools? If so, what are they? Are there differences? If so, what are they? Would it be better to conceive of Eastern philosophy as Eastern religion? Is there a difference between philosophy and religion for these Eastern schools of thought?

What is the distinction between ‘Analytic’ and ‘Continental’ philosophy anyway? Is there a legitimate distinction to be made at all? If so, what’s the best way to distinguish between the two schools: Along geographical lines? By the leading figures of each tradition? Methodological commitments? Topical interests? What are the historical roots (and development) of each school? What are the major topics currently under discussion in each school? What are the closest points of approach between Analytic and Continental philosophy? Is Analytic philosophy merely a way of doing philosophy? Or are there specific interests of Analytic philosophy that are not shared by those doing Continental philosophy?

What is political philosophy? What does the discipline of political philosophy encompass? What’s the relation between political philosophy and politics? Is there any relevance in theorizing about ideal states? Do we need a state at all? What’s the best way to evaluate different forms of government? How should the relation between an individual’s rights and an individual’s duties to the state be adjudicated? How should a state that is in power be modified, improved or dispensed with?

Tune in and help the GRS crew decide what topics they should discuss during their upcoming broadcasts. This special show is designed to be an interactive enterprise, so be sure to either call-in or e-mail the gang with your thoughts. This is your chance to make radio history!

Should drugs be legalized? If so, how? Complete legalization? Controlled legalization? Decriminalization? What is a drug anyway? And “what is it” about a particular drug that makes it either legal or illegal? State legislation? Some inherent property? Consequences related to the drug? Are we asking the right questions? What’s the debate really about? Personal freedom? The protective powers of the state? What are the fundamental philosophical issues?

Do animals have rights? If so, what sort of rights are they? What are they (the animals) entitled to? Whose duty is it to respect their rights? What sort of entities are the proper bearers of rights, anyway? What’s an animal? Are all animals equal? Are the rights that animals possess similar to the rights that humans possess? If so, what is the basis for such rights? Biological life? Moral agency? Consciousness? The awareness of pain or suffering? Does nature tell us anything about how animals should be treated? Should we all become vegetarians?

Do We Have An Ethical Duty To Protect The Environment? What is the environment? What is the value and moral status of the environment? Is the value of the environment merely instrumental? Or does the environment posses some intrinsic value? Does the environment exist, primarily, for the benefit of man? What kinds of ethical obligation do humans have towards non-humans? Is it morally wrong to perform actions that are harmful to future generations?

What is sex? What constitutes a sex act? What is the purpose of sex? Reproduction? Pleasure? Both? No purpose? What does nature tell us, if anything, about sex? Are there any moral obligations related to sexual intimacy?

GRS Real Philosophy Series (Episode 5)

Life in the real world often forces people to engage themselves in various philosophical enterprises, most of which involve the sorting out of various “tough questions.” This eight-part series will focus on several important philosophical issues related to some of those tough questions.

Who are we? What sort of things, metaphysically speaking, are you and I and other human beings? What does it mean to be a person? What is it about us that is able to persist through time? What matters most about personal identity?

GRS Real Philosophy Series (Episode 4)

Life in the real world often forces people to engage themselves in various philosophical enterprises, most of which involve the sorting out of various “tough questions.” This eight-part series will focus on several important philosophical issues related to some of those tough questions.

What is Racism? Is race a biological fact or a social construct? What constitutes racist behavior? Can anyone be a racist? Is racism still a problem?

GRS Real Philosophy Series (Episode 3)

Life in the real world often forces people to engage themselves in various philosophical enterprises, most of which involve the sorting out of various “tough questions.” This eight-part series will focus on several important philosophical issues related to some of those tough questions.

What is free will? Do human beings have free will? Is free will compatible or incompatible with the concept of determinism? What is determinism? Are human beings morally responsible for their actions?

GRS Real Philosophy Series (Episode 2)

Life in the real world often forces people to engage themselves in various philosophical enterprises, most of which involve the sorting out of various “tough questions.” This eight-part series will focus on several important philosophical issues related to some of those tough questions.

Is there a moral difference between killing and letting die? Do individuals have a right to die? What constitutes death? What role should the state play, if any, in answering these sorts of questions?

GRS Real Philosophy Series (Episode 1)

Life in the real world often forces people to engage themselves in various philosophical enterprises, most of which involve the sorting out of various “tough questions.” This eight-part series will focus on several important philosophical issues related to some of those tough questions.

What is art? How should art be judged? Does aesthetic value lie in the eye of the beholder? Or is aesthetic value objective in some way? What is bad art?

Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 7)

The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

Does God exist? What are the arguments that have been offered for the existence of God? Are reason and faith incompatible? What about the problem of evil? Are miracles real?

Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 6)

The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

What is ethics? What sorts of issues do ethicists consider? What’s the distinction, if any, between ‘ethics’ and ‘morality’? How should we determine right and wrong? What are the various ethical theories that have been developed by philosophers? Are values intrinsic or extrinsic? Should morality be legislated? Do we have a duty to help others?

What is knowledge? How do we know what we know? What conditions need to be met in order to say that someone knows something? Is there anything that we cannot know? Why is the study of ‘epistemology’ so important.

Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 4)

The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

What is reality? What really exists? Is anything real at all? Why is there something rather than nothing? Is there a reality independent of our minds? Why is the study of ‘metaphysics’ important?

Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 3)

The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

What is the status of philosophy today? Are people interested in philosophy? Should people be interested in philosophy? If so, how should people be introduced to various philosophical issues?

Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 2)

The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

What is philosophy? What does it mean to do philosophy? What are the major branches of philosophical inquiry? Is philosophy important? What counts as ‘philosophy’ anyway? Is everyone a philosopher? This is the show that started it all folks!

Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 1)

The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.